The Use of Web Services for Inclusive Decision Process: Towards the Enhancement of e-Democracy

  • F. Cabiddu


This article focuses on the case study of the web sites of the Italian regional governments who have agreed to take part in the DE.CI.DI. project which aims put into practice e-democracy in provincial Public Administration. We have assessed the level of e-democracy developments based on four different dimensions: transparency and interactivity. We conclude that the spreading use of Internet has raised expectations that it may be used to encourage a more direct citizen engagement and modify the ways in which public decisions are taken, however those expectations have not been fully met yet.


Information Communication Technology Public Decision Direct Citizen Inclusive Decision Citizen Consequence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Grönlund, A. (2002), (ed.), Electronic Governement: Design, Applications and Management, London, Idea Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Traunmüller, R. and Wimmer, M. (2003), E-Government at a Decisive Moment: Sketching a Roadmap to Excellence, in R. Traunmüller (ed) EGOV 2003, LNCS 2739, Berlin, Springer.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    United Nations (2003) World Public Sector Report: e-Government and the Crossroads, New York, United Nation Publications, October 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    OECD (2004) The E-Government Imperative, Paris, OECD.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rheingold, H. (1993) The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barber, B.R. (1998) Three scenarios for the future of technology and democracy, Political Science Quarterly 113: 573–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gross, T. (2002) E-democracy and Community Networks: Political Visions, Technological Opportunities and Social Reality, Electronic Government: Design, Applications and Management, Grönlund, A. (ed.), pp. 226–248. Idea Group, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Macintosh, A. (2004) Characterizing E-Participation in Policy-Making, Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International, Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, Hawaii.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Andersen, K.V. (2004) E-government and Public Sector Process Rebuilding (PPR), Dilettantes, Wheelbarrows and Diamonds, Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bellamy, C. and Taylor, J. (1996). New Information and Communications Technologies and Institutional Change, International Journal of Public Sector Management 9(4): 51–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Merz, Davenport, E. and Horton, K. (2004). A Social Shaping Perspective on an e-Governmental System(ic) Failure, in R. Traunmueller (ed.) EGOV 2004, LNCS 3183 Berlin, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arnstein, S.R. (1969), A Ladder of Citizen Participation, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 8.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bongers, F.J. (2000), Participatory Policy Analysis and Group Support Systems, Tilburg University.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roberts, N. (2004) Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation, The American Review of Pubblic Administration, 34, 4.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Manin, B. (1987) On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation”, Political Theory, 15, 3: 338–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Majone, G. (1989) Evidence, Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process, New Haven&London, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Elster, J., ed, (1998) Deliberative Democracy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Holden, S.H. (2003) The Evolution of Information Technology Management at the Federal Level: Implications for Public Administration, in Garson G.D. (ed.) Pubblic Information Technology Policy and Management Issues, Hershey, PA, Idea Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hoff, J., Horrocks, I. and Tops, P. (Eds) (2000) Democratic Governance and New Technology. Technologically Mediated Innovations in Political Practise Western Europe, New York, Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dutton, W.H. (1999), Society on the Line. Information Politics in the Digital Age, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anttiroiko, A.V. (2007), Democratic e-Governance – Basic Concepts, issues and Future Trends, Digest of Electronic Government Policy and Regulation, 30: 83–90.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McCullagh, K. (2003) E-democracy: Potential for Political Revolution, International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 11, 2: 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lourenço, R.P. and Costa, J.P. (2006), Incorpotating citizens’views in local policy decision making processes, Decision Support System, 43: 1499–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yin, R. (1994) Case study research, 2nd edition, Thousand Oaks, SageGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Demchak, C.C., C. Friis and T.M. La Porte (2000), Webbing Governance : National Differences in Costructing the Public Face, in G.D. Garson (ed.), Handbook of Public Information Systems, New York, Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università di CagliariCagliariItaly

Personalised recommendations